From Biology
In recent years, William Dembski has pioneered a methodology which has become known as the “explanatory filter,” a means by which design can be inferred from the phenomena of nature in particular living organisms. The filter consists of a sequence of three yes/no questions that guide the decision process of determining whether a given phenomenon can be attributed to an intelligent causal agency. Based upon this filter, if an event, system or object is the product of intelligence, then it will

Thus, in order to be confident that a given phenomenon is the product of intelligent design, it cannot be a regularity that necessarily stems from the laws of nature, nor can it be the result of chance. According to Dembski, the explanatory filter highlights the most important quality of intelligently designed systems, namely, specified complexity. In other words, complexity alone is not enough to indicate the work of an intelligent agent; it must also conform to an independently specified pattern.

Among the most compelling evidence for design in the realm of biology is the discovery of the digital information inherent in living cells. As it turns out, biological information comprises a complex, non-repeating sequence which is highly specified relative to the functional or communication requirements that they perform. Such similarity explains, in part, Dawkins’ observation that, “The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like.” What are we to make of this similarity between informational software—the undisputed product of conscious intelligence—and the informational sequences found in DNA and other important biomolecules?
____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

From Physics
In physics, the concept of cosmic fine tuning gives further support to the design inference. The concept of cosmic fine tuning relates to a unique property of our universe whereby the physical constants and laws are observed to be balanced on a “razor’s edge” for permitting the emergence of complex life. The degree to which the constants of physics must match precise criteria is such that a number of agnostic scientists have concluded that, indeed, there is some sort of transcendent purpose behind the cosmic arena. British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle writes, “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

One example of fine tuning is the rate at which the universe expands. This value must be delicately balanced to a precision of one part in 1055. If the universe expanded too quickly, matter would expand too quickly for the formation of stars, planets and galaxies. If the universe expanded too slowly, the universe would quickly collapse before the formation of stars.

Besides that, the ratio of the electromagnetic force to gravity must be finely balanced to a degree of one part in 1040. If this value were to be increased slightly, all stars would be at least 40% more massive than our sun. This would mean that stellar burning would be too brief and too uneven to support complex life. If this value were to be decreased slightly, all stars would be at least 20% less massive than the sun. This would render them incapable of producing heavy elements necessary to sustain life.
____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

From Cosmology
With modern discoveries in the field of cosmology, the concept of a definitive beginning of the cosmos has been demonstrated almost beyond question. The Kalam argument states that

1. Everything which begins to exist has a cause apart from itself.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause apart from itself.

It thus appears from the data that an uncaused first cause exists outside the four dimensions of space and time, which possesses eternal, personal and intelligent qualities in order to possess the capability of intentionally bringing space, matter—and indeed even time itself—into being.
____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Conclusion
This article is but a brief overview of some of the key elements involved in the design inference. The purpose is to demonstrate the wide body of support for intelligent design from a large range of disciplines, including biology, physics and cosmology.

____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

William Albert "Bill" Dembski (born July 18, 1960) is an American philosopher and theologian. He is a proponent of intelligent design, specifically the concept of specified complexity. He is currently the Philip E. Johnson Research Professor in Culture & Science at the Southern Evangelical Seminary at Matthews, North Carolina, and a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. He is the author of a number of books about intelligent design, including The Design Inference (1998), Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science and Theology (1999), The Design Revolution (2004), The End of Christianity (2009), and Intelligent Design Uncensored (2010).

Soooo lets talk science. He's not a scientist nor could any of his degrees be considered science related. How exactly is he qualified to make any comment on Science?\

Sadly there isn't a garbage science forum. This would fit nicely in it.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

I think not. This is a science forum. What you present is some philospohical claptrap that does circular reasoning to an Nth degree.

Once again you present religous and not scientific evidence as science. You then boldy go where no man has gone before and crossed the physics/biology science line. I feel special. I really do. reading this nonsense is like watching a bad movie. You paid your money and you'll be d@mned if you don't watch that trainwreck until the end.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

I think not. This is a science forum. What you present is some philospohical claptrap that does circular reasoning to an Nth degree.

Once again you present religous and not scientific evidence as science. You then boldy go where no man has gone before and crossed the physics/biology science line. I feel special. I really do. reading this nonsense is like watching a bad movie. You paid your money and you'll be d@mned if you don't watch that trainwreck until the end.

Once again, self-edit. Your intent is to flame.

I will not debate with you. Your only intent is to flame.

Stay on topic.
____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

If by flame you mean that my intent is to expose the absolutely unprovable as bas science then so be it. Perhaps understanding science would help you understand everyone else here.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

If by flame you mean that my intent is to expose the absolutely unprovable as bas science then so be it. Perhaps understanding science would help you understand everyone else here.

As I have already proven; I have corrected you at your science already. Don't you remember your blind faith that I corrected for you? You just really shouldn't have gone there.....

Self-edit, adjust your attitude.

I think we have a problem with your definition of Proven. I use it to say that a person is guilty of a crime or that I didn't eat the last cookie. I don't use it to tell people that the only plausible explanation is God did it. I repeat what I said on your other thread. It must be nice to know exactly what God's will is. Can I get his phone number? I have a few questions answered myself
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

ID & Skildude:
One thread has been locked in the last few minutes because it degenerated into a flame war. Stop now, or this one will go the same way.
____________
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

I think the problem most of us have is that ID has a different idea of what science is than most all of us and that includes scientists. He has his own thoughts and those who work with it have others. It is hard to have a conversation when you speak different languages.
____________

I think the problem most of us have is that ID has a different idea of what science is than most all of us and that includes scientists. He has his own thoughts and those who work with it have others. It is hard to have a conversation when you speak different languages.

I speak both.
____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Argued September 26, 2005-November 4, 2005,
Decided December 20, 2005
Full case name: Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.

Citations: 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)

Holding
Teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (and Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution) because intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
Court membership
John E. Jones III
Laws applied
U.S. Const. Amend. 1; Penn. Const. Art. I, § 3

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Argued September 26, 2005-November 4, 2005,
Decided December 20, 2005
Full case name: Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.

Citations: 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)

Holding
Teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (and Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution) because intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
Court membership
John E. Jones III
Laws applied
U.S. Const. Amend. 1; Penn. Const. Art. I, § 3

Just to make it even clearer, the Judge on this case is and was a conservative and a devout catholic and a firm believer in creationism. Thats a judge that saw the evidence and was convinced that ID is not science and is a religious belief.

____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Argued September 26, 2005-November 4, 2005,
Decided December 20, 2005
Full case name: Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.

Citations: 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)

Holding
Teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (and Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution) because intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
Court membership
John E. Jones III
Laws applied
U.S. Const. Amend. 1; Penn. Const. Art. I, § 3

No, any school has the right to teach what it wants. They are owned and operated by the public, not the law or government, the tax payer owns them?

Are you saying this is a public school? If so then no one has the right to take my free speeh away, as has been done here.

____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Now you all return to point, that would be..."What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design?."
____________
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Argued September 26, 2005-November 4, 2005,
Decided December 20, 2005
Full case name: Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.

Citations: 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)

Holding
Teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (and Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution) because intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
Court membership
John E. Jones III
Laws applied
U.S. Const. Amend. 1; Penn. Const. Art. I, § 3

No, any school has the right to teach what it wants. They are owned and operated by the public, not the law or government, the tax payer owns them?

Are you saying this is a public school? If so then no one has the right to take my free speeh away, as has been done here.

I beg to differ, under no circumstances do I want my tax dollars pay for a religion. Why should I subsidize something which may be trying to harm me?
____________

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Argued September 26, 2005-November 4, 2005,
Decided December 20, 2005
Full case name: Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.

Citations: 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)

Holding
Teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (and Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution) because intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
Court membership
John E. Jones III
Laws applied
U.S. Const. Amend. 1; Penn. Const. Art. I, § 3

No, any school has the right to teach what it wants. They are owned and operated by the public, not the law or government, the tax payer owns them?

Are you saying this is a public school? If so then no one has the right to take my free speeh away, as has been done here.

owned by the public and must follow federal law. yes its a public school. Dover, Pennsylvania school district was loaded with bible thumpers that took it upon themselves to declare ID science. Thus the lawsuit.
you have no free speech here. You have to follow rules set by UC berkeley and the admins of the website to keep a modicum of order and prevent all out chaos which typically happens when you leave a forums to run without any rules.

and please stay on topic
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope